BUS CAPACITY ANALYSIS William F

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

BUS CAPACITY ANALYSIS William F BUS CAPACITY ANALYSIS William F. Hoey and Herbert S. Levinson, Wilbur Smith and Associates This paper provides an initial input for updating the section on bus capacity in the Highway Capacity Manual and identifies parameters, principles, and procedures for estimating the capacity of bus facilities and systems. It reviews available data on bus capacities, suggests design assumptions for bus system planning and analysis, and outlines further research needs. The studies demonstrate that (a) the critical element governing system capacity is the bus station platform or bus stop rather than the busway; (b) at sta­ tions, capacity is determined by the number of door channels on the bus and fare collection practices; and (c) bus capacity should be viewed in terms of people transported rather than buses moved per hour. •BUS capacity values differ widely according to the basic type of operation: in termi­ nals, on arterial streets, or along exclusive busways. This paper concentrates on ca­ pacity analysis of bus lanes and busways because terminal capacity depends heavily on the specific mode and pattern of operation (i.e., extent of intercity operations, layover times, and fare collection practices). Results of previous studies are summarized, basic analytical relationships are presented, and capacity ranges and planning guide­ lines are suggested in an effort to update previous reports (1, 2). The ability of buses to move people under preferential conditions is examined; tflatis, the impedance of other vehicles in mixed traffic is not considered quantitatively. PREVIOUS STUDIES AND EXPERIENCES The number of buses that can operate past a point in a given period of time varies widely according to specific roadway and operating conditions. Previous theoretical studies and actual operating experience provide the basis for subsequent analyses. Theoretical Values Ranges in bus capacities or volumes based on theoretical studies are given in Table 1 (3). These studies have primarily investigated the effect of buses on the capacity of mixed traffic roadways (4, 5). When buses do not stop, bus lane capacity is essentially that of equivalent passenger cars. Thus, assuming normal freeway vehicle headways, theoretical capacities of :;,900 buses/lane/hour could be achieved on exclusive bus road­ ways with uninterrupted flow. Theoretical simulation studies, based on buses that have 30-sec dwell times and that operate in platoons of six between stations 0.3 mile (0.5 km) apart, result in capacities ranging from 350 to 400 buses/hour on an exclusive grade-separated busway (~. Operational Experience Observed bus volumes on heavily used freeways and city streets are given in Table 2 (3). The highest volumes, 735 buses/lane/hour in the Lincoln Tunnel and on the Port Authority Bus Terminal access ramp, are achieved on a completely exclusive right­ of-way where vehicles make no stops. Where bus stops or layovers are involved, re­ ported volumes are much less. 30 31 Table 1. Theoretical bus volumes. Average Buses Bus stop Average Equivalent per Headway Spacing Bus Speed Passenge.rs Source or Facility Hour (sec) (n) (mph) per Hour General Motors Proving Ground Uninterrupted flow 1.450b 2.5 No stops 33 72, 500 Highway Capacity Manual Freeway level of se.rvice D 940 3.8 No stops 33 47,000 Freeway level of service C 690 5.2 No stops 40 to 60 34, 500 General Motors Proving Ground Six-bus platoons, 30-sec on-line stops 400 9.0 Variable 15 to 20 20,000 1965 Highway Capacity Mnnual ArtcrJlll streets, 25-scc loading and 25-sec clearance 72 50 Not cited Not cited 3,600 Toronto Transit Commission Planning criteria 60 BO 500 to 600 10 3,000 Note: 1ft • 0.3 m 1mph • 1.6 km/h. '50 passengers/bus. bSubsequent sludies have reported bus volumes of 900 to 1,000 vehicles/lane/hour; these are consistent with reported rlows Table 2. Observed bus volumes. Average Bus stop Average Equivalent Bua es Headway Spacing Bus Speed Passengers Facility per Hour (sec) (ft) (mph) per Hour Lincoln Tunnel-uninterrupted flow 735 4.9 No stops 30 32, 560 I-495 (New Jersey) exclusive bus lane-uninter~pted Clow 485 7.3 No stops 30 ':o 40 21,600 San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge 350 10.3 No stops 30 to 40 13,000 South Michigan Avenue, Chicago- 5-min rate and some multiple lane use 228 16 Not cited Not cited 11,400' Hillside Avenue, New York City- multiple lane use and lightly patronized stops 170 21 530 Not cited .8,500' Shirley Highway Busway and Fourteenth Street bus lanes 160 23 900b 35' 8,000' State street, Chicago; Market Street, 6 to 12b Philadelphia; and Market Street, San Francisco-multiple lanes 150 24 300 to 600 6 to 10 6, 100 to 9, 900 K street, Washington, D. C. 130 28 500 5 to 8 6,500' Downtown streets in various cities- single lane with stops 90 to 120 30 to 40 500 5 to 10 4, 500 to 6, ooo• Note: 1 ft• 0 3 m. 1 mpli • 1.6 km/h, 1 50 passengers/bus, bin CBD ~ con freeway. ·Bus Stops Stopping a bus to pick up or discharge passengers limits the capacity of a bus lane. Time must be allowed for acceleration, deceleration, stop clearance, and periods when the doors are open. Observed volumes for lanes with intermediate stops rarely exceed 120 buses/ hour, although volumes of ;e,180 buses/ hour are feasible where buses use two or more lanes and where stopped vehicles can be overtaken if there is careful management and control of bus operations. [Maximum streetcar volumes on city streets 50 years ago approached 150 cars/track/hour when there was extensive queuing and platoon loading at heavy stops ('.!).J Bu sways The only existing example of a downtown grade-separated busway is in Rwicorn, England; this busway operates well within its potential capacity. The intermediate stations on the San .Bernardino Freeway Busway in Los Angeles are off-line; the El Monte station of the busway operates as a terminal, and downtown Los Angeles distribution is by on-street bus lanes. Volumes approach 80 buses/hou1· on the busway. 32 BERTH CAPACITY FOR BUSES Reviewing experience suggested that theoretical analysis of bus stop and station opera­ tion could be useful for estimating realistic capacities of busways. Basic Variables and Relationships The number of buses per lane per hour and the number of people they carry depend on the following: 1. The roadway or guideway, for which capacity depends on the number of lanes, their occupancy, signalization, and fl.ow restrictions (or interferences); 2. The vehicle, for which capacity depends on its size and internal circulation capability; 3. The interface between buses and pedestrians at a bus station platform or bus loading zone, for which capacity depends on the number and organization of boarding and alighting channels; and 4. The required clearance times between buses. Various analytical relationships were derived to show how these factors influence the capacity of a downtown busway. The analyses establish ranges in typical time re­ quirements for each of the sequent operations at a bus berth and identify relationships among bus passenger line-haul capacity, boarding and alighting volumes, and major parameters or equipment and facilities. They focus on the peak 10 to 15 min in the rush hour, since this time period usually represents the maximum boarding (or alight­ ing) volumes and the maximum line-haul loading. The basic variables used in the analyses are given below. A= alighting passengers per bus in peak 10 to 15 min; a = alighting service time in seconds per passenger; B = boarding passengers per bus in peak 10 to 15 min; b =boarding service time in seconds per passenger; C = clearance time between successive buses in seconds (time between closing of doors on first bus and opening of doors on second bus); D =bus dwell time at a stop in seconds per bus (time when doors are open and bus is stopped); f =bus frequency in buses per hour (all routes using a facility) at maximum load point (if all buses stop at all stations, f =number of effective berths x f'); h =bus headway on facility in seconds at maximum load point, 3,600/f; f' = maximum peak bus frequency at a berth in buses per hour; h' =minimum bus headway at a berth in seconds, 3,600/f'; G = boarding passenger capacity per berth per hour; H = alighting passenger capacity per berth per hour; J = passengers boarding per hour at heaviest stop or maximum load point; K = passengers alighting per hour at heaviest stop or maximum load point; L = peak-hour load factor in passengers per bus seat per hour at the maximum load point; N =number of effective berths at a station or bus stop, i.e., (N')(u); N' = number of berth spaces provided in a multiberth station; P = line-haul capacity of bus facility in total persons per hour past the maximum load point (hourly flow rate based on peak 10 to 15 min); S = seating capacity of bus, varies with design; u = berth use factor (an efficiency factor applied to total number of berths to esti­ mate realistic capacity of a multiberth station, i.e., N/N'); X = percentage of maximum load-point passengers boarding at heaviest stop, J/P; and Y = percentage of maximum load-point passengers alighting at heaviest stop, K/P. 33 Equations for the basic relationships for a single station are as follows: h' = Bb + C (1) f' - 3,600 - 3,600 (2) - h' - Bb + C _ f'B "' 3,600B (3) G - Bb + C _ .!!._ _ J(Bb + C) N - G - 3,600B (4) (5) The capacity of any system is governed by the number of passengers (a) boarding or alighting at the heaviest stop or (b) traveling past the maximum load point (between stops), whichever is less.
Recommended publications
  • Transit Service Design Guidelines
    Transit Service Design Guidelines Department of Rail and Public Transportation November 2008 Transit Service Design Guidelines Why were these guidelines for new transit service developed? In FY2008 alone, six communities in Virginia contacted the Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation about starting new transit service in their community. They and many other communities throughout Virginia are interested in learning how new transit services can enhance travel choices and mobility and help to achieve other goals, such as quality of life, economic opportunity, and environmental quality. They have heard about or seen successful transit systems in other parts of the state, the nation, or the world, and wonder how similar systems might serve their communities. They need objective and understandable information about transit and whether it might be appropriate for them. These guidelines will help local governments, transit providers and citizens better understand the types of transit systems and services that are available to meet community and regional transportation needs. The guidelines also help the Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation (DRPT) in making recommendations to the Commonwealth Transportation Board for transit investments, by 1) providing information on the types of systems or services that are best matched to community needs and local land use decisions, and 2) ensuring that resources are used effectively to achieve local, regional, and Commonwealth goals. Who were these guidelines developed for? These guidelines are intended for three different audiences: local governments, transit providers and citizens. Therefore, some will choose to read the entire document while others may only be interested in certain sections.
    [Show full text]
  • The Relationship Between Safety, Capacity, and Operating Speed on Bus Rapid Transit
    THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SAFETY, CAPACITY, AND OPERATING SPEED ON BUS RAPID TRANSIT NICOLAE DUDUTA,EMBARQ CLAUDIA ADRIAZOLA-STEIL,EMBARQ DARIO HIDALGO, EMBARQ LUIS ANTONIO LINDAU,EMBARQ PAULA MANOELA DOS SANTOS, EMBARQ EMAIL FOR CORRESPONDENCE: [email protected] This is an abridged version of the paper presented at the conference. The full version is being submitted elsewhere. Details on the full paper can be obtained from the author. The Relationship between Safety, Capacity, and Operating Speed on Bus Rapid Transit DUDUTA, Nicolae; ADRIAZOLA-STEIL Claudia; HIDALGO, Dario; LINDAU, Luis Antonio; SANTOS, Paula Manoela; THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SAFETY, CAPACITY, AND OPERATING SPEED ON BUS RAPID TRANSIT CASE STUDY: TRANSOESTE BRT, RIO DE JANEIRO Nicolae Duduta1, Claudia Adriazola-Steil1, Dario Hidalgo1, Luis Antonio Lindau2, Paula Manoela dos Santos2 1: EMBARQ – the WRI Center for Sustainable Transport, 10 G St. NE Suite 800, Washington DC, 2: EMBARQ Brasil, Rua Luciana de Abreu, 471/801 90570-060 Porto Alegre/RS, Brazil Email for correspondence: [email protected] th 13 WCTR, 2013 – Rio de Janeiro, Brazil 1 The Relationship between Safety, Capacity, and Operating Speed on Bus Rapid Transit DUDUTA, Nicolae; ADRIAZOLA-STEIL Claudia; HIDALGO, Dario; LINDAU, Luis Antonio; SANTOS, Paula Manoela; ABSTRACT There is a growing body of research on the traffic safety aspects of Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) corridors in Latin American cities. The findings suggest that some BRT design features – such as center lane configurations, left turn prohibitions, and signalized mid-block pedestrian crossings with refuge islands – can significantly improve safety on the corridors where BRTs operate. However, there is still a gap in knowledge about how the different safety features might impact the operational performance of the BRT.
    [Show full text]
  • Comparison Between Bus Rapid Transit and Light-Rail Transit Systems: a Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis Approach
    Urban Transport XXIII 143 COMPARISON BETWEEN BUS RAPID TRANSIT AND LIGHT-RAIL TRANSIT SYSTEMS: A MULTI-CRITERIA DECISION ANALYSIS APPROACH MARÍA EUGENIA LÓPEZ LAMBAS1, NADIA GIUFFRIDA2, MATTEO IGNACCOLO2 & GIUSEPPE INTURRI2 1TRANSyT, Transport Research Centre, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, Spain 2Department of Civil Engineering and Architecture (DICAR), University of Catania, Italy ABSTRACT The construction choice between two different transport systems in urban areas, as in the case of Light-Rail Transit (LRT) and Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) solutions, is often performed on the basis of cost-benefit analysis and geometrical constraints due to the available space for the infrastructure. Classical economic analysis techniques are often unable to take into account some of the non-monetary parameters which have a huge impact on the final result of the choice, since they often include social acceptance and sustainability aspects. The application of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) techniques can aid decision makers in the selection process, with the possibility to compare non-homogeneous criteria, both qualitative and quantitative, and allowing the generation of an objective ranking of the different alternatives. The coupling of MCDA and Geographic Information System (GIS) environments also permits an easier and faster analysis of spatial parameters, and a clearer representation of indicator comparisons. Based on these assumptions, a LRT and BRT system will be analysed according to their own transportation, economic, social and environmental impacts as a hypothetical exercise; moreover, through the use of MCDA techniques a global score for both systems will be determined, in order to allow for a fully comprehensive comparison. Keywords: BHLS, urban transport, transit systems, TOPSIS.
    [Show full text]
  • Bus Rapid Transit As Formalization: Accessibility Impacts of Transport Reform in Cape Town, South Africa
    Bus rapid transit as formalization: Accessibility impacts of transport reform in Cape Town, South Africa by Lisa Rayle A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in City & Regional Planning in the Graduate Division of the University of California, Berkeley Committee in charge: Associate Professor Daniel Chatman, Chair Professor Emeritus Robert Cervero Professor Emerita Elizabeth Deakin Associate Professor Alison Post Fall 2017 Bus rapid transit as formalization: Accessibility impacts of transport reform in Cape Town, South Africa Copyright 2017 by Lisa Rayle 1 Abstract Bus rapid transit as formalization: Accessibility impacts of transport reform in Cape Town, South Africa by Lisa Rayle Doctor of Philosophy in City & Regional Planning University of California, Berkeley Associate Professor Daniel Chatman, Chair Many cities worldwide are introducing bus rapid transit (BRT) into contexts where informal transport modes serve a substantial part of the public transport market. These BRT initia- tives are intended, among other goals, to formalize existing transport systems and to improve accessibility. However, the extent to which BRT reforms actually improve residents' ability to reach activities remains in question. In this dissertation, I contribute to the empirical and theoretical literature on informal transport by investigating how BRT reform has impacted accessibility for residents of Cape Town, South Africa. How have Cape Town's transport reforms affected accessibility and its distribution amongst different population groups? Why have reforms had these effects? I address these questions using three methods: (1) an accessibility index computed using a transport network model, (2) a difference-in-difference approach using intercept survey data, and (3) interviews with users and stakeholders.
    [Show full text]
  • Passenger Terminal Impedances JEFFREY M
    -Passenger Terminal Impedances JEFFREY M. BRUGGEMAN and RICHARD D. WORRALL, Peat, Marwick, Mitchell and Co. Conventional transportation network analysis requires the estimation of the times necessary to complete three portions of a typical intercity trip. Al­ though the times associated with the line-haul and access portions have been studied extensively, the time required for transfer between access and line­ haul modes has not been handled adequately. These times, or impedances, occur at any intercity passenger terminal for air, rail, and bus modes. This paper identifies each of the major components of the passenger ter­ minal system and develops the respective impedance methodology for each as well as a technique for combining them into a single value representative of the total impedance level for a particular terminal. Data were collected at several intercity terminals in the Washington, D. C., area; and the im­ pedance levels were determined for each terminal. The methodology and many of the component values are directly transferable to other terminals. In addition, the methodology may be used as an aid in evaluating alternative functional arrangements of the various terminal facilities. •A CONVENTIONAL network simulation model distributes transportation flows across the network as an inverse function of the difficulty, or "impedance," of travel along each link. For a regional network, at least three major categories of impedance may be defined: 1. Link impedance is the measure of the average "line-haul" travel times, costs, or distances associated with travel along the major links of the regional network. 2. Access impedance is the measure of the average "access" times, costs, or distances involved in traveling from a typical origin or destination point to the nearest access/ egress point on the regional network.
    [Show full text]
  • Traffic Methodologies for Bus Rapid Transit Corridors: Recommended Guidance September 2019
    Traffic Methodologies for Bus Rapid Transit Corridors: Recommended Guidance September 2019 Report prepared for FDOT Contract Number: C9N85 Task Work Order 34: Traffic Methodologies for Bus Rapid Transit Corridors Recommended Guidance September 2019 Prepared By: CDM Smith 101 Southhall Lane, Suite 200 Maitland, FL 32751 Prepared for: Gabrielle Mathews Chris A. Wiglesworth Florida Department of Transportation, Transit Office 605 Suwannee Street, MS 26 Tallahassee, FL 32399 Phone: (850) 414-4532 Email: [email protected].Ň.us TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 1 Topic Overview ................................................................................................................................... 1 Purpose of This Guidance .................................................................................................................... 2 Report Organization ........................................................................................................................... 3 Understanding the Process and Key Concepts ........................................................................................ 5 The Transit Project Planning Process and Stages of Traffic Analysis ................................................... 5 Traffic Analysis During Programming and Alternatives Screening (TCAR Process).......................... 5 Traffic Analysis During Project Development and
    [Show full text]
  • Operating a Bus Rapid Transit System
    APTA STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM APTA-BTS-BRT-RP-007-10 RECOMMENDED PRACTICE Approved October, 2010 American Public Transportation Association APTA BRT Operations Working 1666 K Street, NW, Washington, DC, 20006-1215 Group Operating a Bus Rapid Transit System Abstract: This Recommended Practice provides guidance for operational considerations for bus rapid transit systems. Keywords: bus rapid transit (BRT), operations Summary: BRT is a suite of elements that create a high-quality rapid transit experience using rubber-tired vehicles. This experience often includes a high degree of performance (especially speed and reliability), ease of use, careful attention to aesthetics and comprehensive planning that includes associated land uses. BRT seeks to meet or exceed these characteristics through the careful application of selected elements. Scope and purpose: The purpose of this document is to provide guidance to planners, transit agencies, local governments, developers and others interested in operating a BRT systems or enhancing existing BRT systems. This Recommended Practice is part of a series of APTA documents covering the key elements that may comprise a BRT system. Because BRT elements perform best when working together as a system, each Recommended Practice may refer to other documents in the series. Agencies are advised to review all relevant guidance documents for their selected elements. This Recommended Practice represents a common viewpoint of those parties concerned with its provisions, namely, transit operating/planning agencies, manufacturers, consultants, engineers and general interest groups. The application of any standards, practices or guidelines contained herein is voluntary. In some cases, federal and/or state regulations govern portions of a rail transit system’s operations.
    [Show full text]
  • Bus Rapid Transit for New York City
    Bus Rapid Transit For New York City Prepared for Transportation Alternatives NYPIRG Straphangers Campaign June 2002 Schaller Consulting 94 Windsor Place, Brooklyn, NY (718) 768-3487 [email protected] www.schallerconsult.com Summary New York City has the slowest bus service in America. NYC Transit buses travel at an average speed of 7.5 mph. On bus routes such as the M96, M23, M15, Q32, BX35 and B63, the average speed is 6 mph or less. That buses are traveling in slow motion is obvious to everyone, especially riders, who rank it the most serious problem with bus service. Slow bus service discourages people from taking buses, especially for work trips where travel time is critical. Slow bus service contributes to very long travel times to work in New York City, as shown by the latest census. Bus service is slow for many reasons. Traffic congestion is clearly a major factor. But other problems are just as important: • Buses spend as much as 30% of their time waiting for passengers to board and exit. • Increased crowding on buses due to ridership growth has lengthened delays from boarding and exiting. • Traffic signals are not synchronized with bus speeds, so buses are delayed by red lights between bus stops. • Drivers often have to slow down to stay on schedule even when traffic is light. • Bus field supervisors lack the tools to prevent bus bunching. SCHALLER CONSULTING 1 Summary (cont.) Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) is a promising strategy for improving bus service. By applying features used in rail service to bus service, BRT can make buses faster, more reliable and more attractive.
    [Show full text]
  • Characteristics of Bus Rapid Transit for Decision-Making
    Project No: FTA-VA-26-7222-2004.1 Federal United States Transit Department of August 2004 Administration Transportation CharacteristicsCharacteristics ofof BusBus RapidRapid TransitTransit forfor Decision-MakingDecision-Making Office of Research, Demonstration and Innovation NOTICE This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the United States Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The United States Government assumes no liability for its contents or use thereof. The United States Government does not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers’ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the objective of this report. Form Approved REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE OMB No. 0704-0188 Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302, and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0704-0188), Washington, DC 20503. 1. AGENCY USE ONLY (Leave blank) 2. REPORT DATE 3. REPORT TYPE AND DATES August 2004 COVERED BRT Demonstration Initiative Reference Document 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5. FUNDING NUMBERS Characteristics of Bus Rapid Transit for Decision-Making 6. AUTHOR(S) Roderick B. Diaz (editor), Mark Chang, Georges Darido, Mark Chang, Eugene Kim, Donald Schneck, Booz Allen Hamilton Matthew Hardy, James Bunch, Mitretek Systems Michael Baltes, Dennis Hinebaugh, National Bus Rapid Transit Institute Lawrence Wnuk, Fred Silver, Weststart - CALSTART Sam Zimmerman, DMJM + Harris 8.
    [Show full text]
  • Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Systems Eligibility Criteria and Guidelines CRITERIA – February, 2017
    Climate Bonds Standard and Certification Scheme Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Systems Eligibility Criteria and Guidelines CRITERIA – February, 2017 The following criteria applies to Part B – Low Carbon Criteria, under clauses 8 [Eligible projects and physical assets] and clause 9 [Technical criteria] of the Climate Bond Standard version 2.1. For a bond to be certified as a Climate Bond, the funds raised under it must be used to finance or re-finance: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Systems– that is, components of any BRT project meeting Bronze, Silver or Gold score under the BRT Standard*, as developed by the Institute of Transportation and Development Policy, will be eligible for certification under the Climate Bonds Standard (V2.1). *Refer to guidelines below for minimum performance requirement. Rationale High quality BRT has been shown to be associated with the improvement of bus travel speeds and reliability and the smoothing of traffic flows, leading to greater mode shifting and reduced greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Lower quality bus improvements that provide only Basic BRT or less tend to result in lower bus speeds, reduced reliability of service, less mode shifting, and minimal GHG emission reduction compared with business as usual. The 2014 BRT Standard, attached as Annex 1, has been developed as a simple system for appraising the design quality and operational functionality of BRT systems, and is a good surrogate for GHG benefits of BRT. The Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Standard was developed by the Institute for Transportation and Development Policy in 2010 to establish a common definition of BRT, which was needed in response to modest improvements to bus service being inaccurately labeled as BRT.
    [Show full text]
  • The Airport As an Expression of Circulation *’
    MM'S RICE UNIVERSITY \ InrtThe Airport As An Expression Of Circulation *’ Michael Theodore Tudury A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF Master in Architecture W/J\AA/VUIAA Professor Milllain Cannady | Professor Anderson Todd Houston. Texas Mav 1968 TO SUSAN ACKNOWLEDGMENT I would like to express my appreciation to Mr, Anderson Todd, Mr. William Cannaday, Mr. Kellog Wong and Mr. O. Jack Mitchell, professors in the School of Architecture at Rice University, for their guidance, assistance and genuine interest in the preparation of this thesis. I would also like to thank the School of Architecture at Rice University for enabling me to undertake graduate studies through the grant of a fellowship, without which the immediate furthering of my education would have been impossible. ABSTRACT Thesis: The Airport As An Expression Of Circulation Research was undertaken of the elements and patterns of circulation of existing airport design. The study classifies the concepts and assesses the value of the- different systems. The thesis proposes a comprehensive re-evaluation of existing approaches and new concepts through con¬ centration upon the individual elements of circulation. FEBRUARY 1883: “It may be urged that there is nothing mysterious about wing motion, and a simple up and down flapping will at least suffice to raise a bird in the air. Why should not men fly? The answer is that they are not strong enough." TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF TABLES AND CHARTS iv LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS , v Chapter I. HISTORY 1 II. STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM .. 6 III. ANALYSIS OF EXISTING AIRPORTS 17 Dulles International (Washington, D.C.) Memphis O’Hare (Chicago) St.
    [Show full text]
  • Bid/Proposal Custodian 4 World Trade Center 150 Greenwich Street, 21St Floor New York, New York 10007
    PROCUREMENT DEPARTMENT ATTN: BID/PROPOSAL CUSTODIAN 4 WORLD TRADE CENTER 150 GREENWICH STREET, 21ST FLOOR NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10007 REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFP) ISSUE DATE: SEPTEMBER 11, 2019 TITLE: OPERATE, MANAGE AND MAINTAIN THE ON-AIRPORT BUS FLEET AT JOHN F. KENNEDY AND LAGUARDIA AIRPORTS RFP NUMBER: 58819 SUBMIT PROPOSALS NO LATER THAN THE DUE DATE AND TIME TO THE ABOVE ADDRESS PRE-PROPOSAL/ FACILITY INPSECTION MEETING: OCTOBER 1, 2019 TIME: 9:00 AM EDT QUESTIONS DUE BY: OCTOBER 2, 2019 TIME: 3:00 PM EDT PROPOSAL DUE DATE: OCTOBER 18, 2019 TIME: 2:00 PM EDT CONTACT: RICHARD A. GREHL EMAIL: [email protected] 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS EMAIL: ...................................................................................................................................... 1 1. INFORMATION FOR PROPOSERS ON THIS REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS 4 A. General Information: The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey ............... 4 B. Brief Summary of Scope of Work ............................................................................... 4 C. Deadline for Receipt of Proposals ............................................................................... 5 D. Vendor Profile ............................................................................................................... 5 E. Submission of Proposals ............................................................................................... 5 F. Communications Regarding this RFP ........................................................................ 6 G. Proposal Acceptance or
    [Show full text]